The swing of the democratic pendulum is slow and long

We haven’t
yet figured out how to replace political parties with some other vehicle for
democratic participation.

There’s
been a lot of fairly superficial reporting of late about “anti-democratic”
governments in Italy, Greece and elsewhere. By this, they often mean that
Germany, Brussels and the IMF are calling the shots; and that “technocratic”
governments have been imposed, etc.

First,
there’s nothing necessarily undemocratic about having to go through some
difficult times as a result of decisions to which electorates contributed by
their voting and other behaviour. One of the main features of democracy
is that it corrects in slow time. Corrections in Italy and Greece have included
a certain degree of imposition from outside the country – from those to whom
the citizens of Italy and Greece are in hock, i.e. to whom they have
voluntarily mortgaged their assets.

In
the UK, voters went along with a central planning, statist approach from 1940
until Thatcher came along. We then underwent a quarter century of Thatcherite
correction, an era which probably came to an end finally in 2007. The pendulum
often swings slow and far in democracies. So perhaps the Greek and Italian
democratic cultures are being formed by the experience of the corrections they
are undergoing now, by the slow and frustrating swing of the pendulum far out
of reach. Perhaps in the future, Greek voters will opt for a less hollow state,
and for a stronger sense of citizenship and a greater awareness of the Tragedy of the
Commons. Perhaps it will become unfashionable to avoid paying taxes,
so as to avoid the sense of disempowerment that are going through now.

But
there is a democratic deficit within the EU: one that’s more deeply
inlaid, and widespread. It’s commonly said, and I agree, that Europeans have
become alienated from politics, especially young people. It’s partly because of
venal and cynical politicians, sure. But political parties are likely to have
less appeal in an era when which social class and which branch of the Church
you belong to are far less divisive issues than they once were; when more and
more people are educated to a healthy level of scepticism; and when the easy
and rapid availability of data allowing us to judge the implications of
policies means “think-tank driven” policy often trumps ideology. But we haven’t
yet figured out how to replace political parties with some other vehicle for
democratic participation. Crowd-sourcing doesn’t do it. Nor do social media
quite fit the bill.

Alienated
citizens are not what you need in a time of difficult choices. And this has
been made worse by the structural dynamics of power within the EU.

National
governments have handed over a portion of their power to Brussels. They in
their turn have sucked up power from local councils, to compensate. This leaves
local councils bereft - where can they suck up power from? Result:
local politics have become unattractive and dull, and so young people in
particular have no interest in engaging.

And
if politics don’t work, then where are conflicts anticipated, managed and
resolved? Has the EU, famously said to be a glorious peacebuilding project,
actually undermined the democratic mechanisms which are so essential to peace?

I don’t say
that political power is a zero sum commodity, but it’s not infinitely elastic,
either. More of it needs to be accessible to young people, which I think means
more local decision-making about things that really matter – not just about how
to implement directives from the capital, from Brussels and from other
international rule setters.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 licence.
If you have any queries about republishing please contact us.
Please check individual images for licensing details.